Control

# Control — Intel Core Ultra 5 225 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER

The pairing of Intel's 10-core Core Ultra 5 225 with NVIDIA's Turing-based RTX 2060 SUPER produces a fascinating study in system balance for Control, a game that famously leans on both GPU rasterization and real-time effects. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a system that is clearly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, but with enough CPU headroom to push surprisingly high frame rates at 1080p Low. The data suggests this combination is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K requiring significant settings compromises to stay playable.

Resolution Scaling

The most striking pattern in the measured data is how sharply performance degrades as resolution increases. At 1080p High, the system delivers 74 FPS average, which drops to 56 FPS at 1440p High — a 24% reduction — and then to 38 FPS at 4K High, a further 32% drop from 1440p. This steep decline from 1440p to 4K is the hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario, where the RTX 2060 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated by the pixel count.

The scaling pattern becomes even more telling when examining the Low preset. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 118 FPS, which only falls to 89 FPS at 1440p Low (a 25% drop) and then to 60 FPS at 4K Low (a 33% drop from 1440p). The fact that even at Low settings, 4K performance halves relative to 1080p indicates that the GPU architecture — with 2176 shading units and 64 ROPs — is the primary constraint at higher resolutions, regardless of how light the rendering load becomes.

What's particularly interesting is the diminishing returns seen when moving from Medium to High at each resolution. At 1440p, Medium produces 63 FPS while High produces 56 FPS — only a 7 FPS difference. At 4K, the gap between Medium (43 FPS) and High (38 FPS) is just 5 FPS. This suggests that the High preset's additional visual features (likely including more demanding volumetric effects) are not the bottleneck; rather, the sheer pixel throughput at 4K is what limits the card. The data implies that a gamer seeking higher frame rates at 4K would see more benefit from lowering resolution than from tweaking individual settings.

GPU Role

The RTX 2060 SUPER is the clear limiting factor in this combination, particularly at 4K. With a boost clock of 1650 MHz and 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, it sits at the 62nd percentile among all GPUs in the benchmark database. Its nearest rivals include the RTX 3060 Mobile (0.4% slower) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (0.5% slower), placing it in a competitive mid-range tier that struggles with 4K gaming.

The memory subsystem tells a critical story. The 8 GB VRAM capacity, paired with a 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, is adequate for 1080p and 1440p in Control, but the 4K results suggest the card is hitting both bandwidth and capacity walls. The 38 FPS average at 4K High is below the 40 FPS threshold that most gamers consider the minimum for playable action, and the 33 FPS at 4K Ultra confirms this is not a 4K-capable configuration for this title.

Interestingly, the GPU's Passmark G3D score of 16462 (with an average benchmark score of 18093) aligns with the measured gaming performance — it's a solid mid-range card that excels at 1080p and handles 1440p well, but 4K is clearly beyond its intended design envelope. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2011 further reinforces this positioning, suggesting the card's compute and rasterization capabilities are tuned for mainstream resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225, with its 10 cores and 10 threads, is an interesting companion for this GPU. Running at a base clock of 3.30 GHz and boosting to 4.90 GHz, this Arrow Lake-S processor shows strong single-thread performance — its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3655 and Passmark single-thread score of 4412 place it in the 85th percentile among all CPUs. This is crucial for Control, which benefits from strong per-core performance in its physics and AI systems.

The CPU's multi-threaded capabilities are equally robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25891 and a Passmark multi-thread score of 30459. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, scores nearly identically (36945 vs. 36938 average benchmark score), suggesting the Ultra 5 225 is well-matched against contemporary mid-range processors.

The key question is whether the CPU ever becomes the bottleneck in this pairing. The data strongly suggests it does not. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 118 FPS, which is a high frame rate but not one that would indicate CPU saturation. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see frame rates plateau at similar levels across resolutions — but instead, we see a clear progression from 118 FPS at 1080p Low to 60 FPS at 4K Low, demonstrating that the GPU is the binding constraint at every resolution.

That said, the CPU's 20 MB of shared L3 cache and DDR5 memory support (with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth) provide ample headroom for the GPU to operate without starvation. The 3 nm process node and 17,800 million transistors suggest a modern, efficient design that won't introduce stutter or frame-time inconsistencies. The measured data shows minimum FPS figures of 71 at 1080p Medium and 54 at 1440p Medium, indicating that the CPU maintains consistent frame delivery even when the GPU is under load.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its strongest performance envelope. Low settings produce 118 FPS average, which is excellent for fast-paced action. Medium settings deliver 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 and maximum of 96, showing solid consistency. High settings yield 74 FPS, and Ultra drops to 65 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 53 FPS, indicating that at 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom that even Ultra settings remain playable.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops become more pronounced. Low settings still deliver a respectable 89 FPS, but Medium falls to 63 FPS (with 54 min and 73 max), High to 56 FPS, and Ultra to 49 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 40 FPS, showing that the GPU is starting to feel the pressure of additional pixels. The 1440p results suggest that High is the sweet spot for visual quality while maintaining 56 FPS, though gamers prioritizing frame rate might prefer Medium's 63 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 2060 SUPER clearly struggles. Low settings produce 60 FPS, which is exactly at the threshold of smooth gameplay, but Medium drops to 43 FPS (36 min, 49 max), High to 38 FPS, and Ultra to 33 FPS. The minimum FPS of 36 at 4K Medium indicates noticeable frame drops during intense scenes. The 4K results are consistent with the GPU's 62nd percentile ranking — it's a capable 1080p/1440p card, but 4K requires either Low settings or a more powerful GPU.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Control at 4K?*

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where it achieves 60 FPS average. At Medium, the frame rate drops to 43 FPS, and at High/Ultra it falls to 38 FPS and 33 FPS respectively. For a consistent 60 FPS experience at 4K, Low settings are required.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination?

A: The data indicates 1440p is the optimal resolution. At High settings, the system delivers 56 FPS, which is playable, while Medium provides 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS. 1080p offers higher frame rates (up to 118 FPS on Low), but 1440p provides a better balance of visual fidelity and performance.

*Q: Is this system CPU-bound or GPU-bound in Control?*

A: The data clearly shows GPU-bound behavior. Frame rates scale consistently with resolution changes — from 118 FPS at 1080p Low to 60 FPS at 4K Low — which is the signature of GPU limitation. The CPU's strong single-thread performance (3655 in Cinebench R23 single-core) provides ample headroom.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 18093 is nearly identical to the RTX 3060 Mobile (18159, 0.4% faster) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18189, 0.5% faster). It sits at the 62nd percentile among all GPUs, confirming its mid-range positioning.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average is 74 FPS. For comparison, Medium settings produce 84 FPS, and Ultra produces 65 FPS. All settings at 1080p provide playable frame rates, with the minimum recorded at 71 FPS on Medium settings.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 5 225 a good match for this GPU?

A: Yes, the data suggests excellent balance. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking and strong multi-core performance (25891 in Cinebench R23) ensure it never bottlenecks the GPU. Its nearest CPU rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, scores nearly identically, confirming its competitive positioning.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1080p, the High preset (74 FPS) offers an excellent balance of visual quality and performance — it's 10 FPS slower than Medium but provides noticeably better visuals. Ultra (65 FPS) is also viable if you prioritize image quality over frame rate headroom.

For 1440p, the Medium preset (63 FPS, 54 min) is the recommended choice. It maintains a comfortable frame rate above 60 FPS average while still looking significantly better than Low. The High preset (56 FPS) is acceptable for gamers who prefer visual fidelity, but the 54 FPS minimum on Medium suggests that High might experience occasional dips below 50 FPS during intense scenes.

At 4K, the data strongly recommends the Low preset (60 FPS). Medium drops to 43 FPS, which is below the smoothness threshold for action games. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K (17 FPS) is substantial, indicating that the GPU is severely constrained at this resolution. For 4K gaming, Low settings are the only way to achieve a consistent 60 FPS experience.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution above 1080p. At 1440p it produces 49 FPS, and at 4K it drops to 33 FPS — both below the 50 FPS threshold that most gamers consider minimum for smooth gameplay. Even at 1080p, the 65 FPS average on Ultra is only 9 FPS lower than High, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest settings.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of Intel Core Ultra 5 225 + RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2054th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 29th percentile of all system configurations. This ranking reflects the GPU's mid-range positioning — the RTX 2060 SUPER is an end-of-life product from the Turing generation (released July 2019), while the CPU is a current-generation Arrow Lake part (released January 2025).

The rank disparity between the components is notable. The CPU sits at the 85th percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits at the 62nd percentile. This creates an imbalanced system where the CPU is significantly more capable than the GPU, which explains why the combo's overall ranking (71st percentile for the combo, calculated from 2054/2888) is closer to the GPU's percentile than the CPU's.

The practical implication of this ranking is that the RTX 2060 SUPER is the component holding back the system's overall performance in Control. Upgrading the GPU would yield substantial gains, as the CPU clearly has the headroom to support a more powerful graphics card. The measured frame rates confirm this analysis — the system never approaches CPU-bound territory, even at 1080p Low where the 118 FPS result still leaves room for higher frame rates if the GPU could deliver them.

For gamers with this exact combination, the data suggests that the system's 4K performance is the weakest aspect, while 1080p and 1440p performance are solid for the GPU's class. The 2054th rank out of 2888 combos indicates that roughly 29% of tested systems perform worse, making this a below-average but not bottom-tier configuration for Control. The system's real strength lies in its 1080p performance, where it delivers playable frame rates across all settings, and its 1440p Medium performance, which offers a good balance of visuals and smoothness.